I am sure they never, ever argue.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I have another question for YOU to ignore
- Thread starter savagewind
- Start date
I think @djhwoodwerks says it isn't right.
Yay, an easy one.
Probably not.
I say "Probably not" rather than "No", because 'truth' can be a tricky word.
There are manuscripts that clearly have words added ... including large passages of words. There are manuscripts that have words changed (mostly obvious copyist errors, but not always). However there are literally thousands of ancient manuscript copies in multiple languages from different continents to compare, so 98% of the words are known to be from the original manuscript with virtual certainty. The 2% that are in question are clearly known and called out with footnotes in some Bibles and printed in italics in others and omitted in still others (to be placed in a footnote).
In the case like a contradiction between 700 and 7000, clearly there is an error. In other cases, like the story of Jesus and the Woman caught in Adultery, it is KNOWN that it was not original to the manuscript, but does that mean that the story is 'false'? A question above my pay grade. I tend to assume that it is true but not original and, therefore, treat it with greater caution.
Since the NT was written in Greek and I don't read Greek, there is with 100% certainty a change in the words due to translation. Does that make it 'false'? I don't think so. It just means that I need to go to Strong's for an occasional critical word and see several translations to check what I am reading for bias.
What I have not seen is any evidence for massive error or revision in fundamental truths contained within the Bible. It says people are naturally drawn towards evil, and I have found that to be true. It says they don't want to change, and I have found that mostly true. It says that God draws some to himself and changes them from the inside, and that, too has turned out to be true. Given the big things that the Bible has gotten right, I am not inclined to bet against it on even the little things.
(Evolution makes WAY more sense than a 6 day creation, but my money is on 6 Days.)
Looking at it in context:
John 8:37-47
37 “I know that you are Abraham’s descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you. 38 I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with your father.”
39 They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.”
Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham. 40 But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this. 41 You do the deeds of your father.”
Then they said to Him, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father—God.”
42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me. 43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me. 46 Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me? 47 He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”
I think they are two unrelated points. Jesus is addressing the fact that they are both trying to kill him (thus they are murderers like the Devil), and they are telling lies about him (thus they are liars like the Devil).
I am not aware that the devil killed anyone. Who did the devil kill?
IF anything that was at first "god-breathed" was at some later time changed by a man's hand and people keep saying it is what God says, it is lying like the devil lied.
It is written that the devil's lie caused death which is called murder in the Bible.
People who teach that the Bible is what God says and wants us to know, but anything in it isn't what God said, it is lying. Because it is lying and you bring God into the lie, YOU have God lying about what God said.
It is written that the devil's lie caused death which is called murder in the Bible.
People who teach that the Bible is what God says and wants us to know, but anything in it isn't what God said, it is lying. Because it is lying and you bring God into the lie, YOU have God lying about what God said.
THEY say God would not lie (I believe that!) so God keeps the Bible true.
But God never actually said that everything in the Bible is what God says.
What has God said? I am convinced God said, "This is My Son, whom I have chosen; listen to Him!" and "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.".
I am not aware of anything else God has said.
I am convinced God has not said, "The Bible will be my words which I have chosen, listen to it" and "The Bible will be what I love, and I am well pleased with it".
But God never actually said that everything in the Bible is what God says.
What has God said? I am convinced God said, "This is My Son, whom I have chosen; listen to Him!" and "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.".
I am not aware of anything else God has said.
I am convinced God has not said, "The Bible will be my words which I have chosen, listen to it" and "The Bible will be what I love, and I am well pleased with it".
Last edited:
Through his deception of Eve, everyone.
All of the children and workers of Job.
Everyone tempted to sin by him and his minions.
Everyone damned by following his false religions.
If the Satan and his demons are the power behind the false religion and idolatry, all of the babies sacrificed to (Molec?)
I do not believe that Adam and Eve were created as humans who would not die physically.
I hate arguing generalities. So let's be specific.
My Bible has a footnote on John 7:53 that says "Later mss add the story of the adulterous woman, numbering it as John 7:53-8:11".
1. There is no attempt to claim that God said anything that God did not say.
2. I do not know who added it or why. We do not have the original manuscripts that John wrote. I know that it is placed in different locations in different copies. Do we know for sure that the story is not inspired? No. Do we know for sure that it is inspired? No. So it is included with a warning that we do not know.
3. The story contains no theological truth that is not taught anywhere else. Therefore, whether it is inspired or not, does not alter the fundamental truths of the Bible. At worst it presents a fictional account of what Jesus might have done, but didn't. At best, it presents an inspired story of what Jesus did that got misplaced in some later manuscripts and lost in a few surviving earlier ones.
4. Where have I lied in any of that?
Would this include reading the OT in anything except the original Hebrew and the NT in anything but the original Greek ... since clearly translations would involve God's word being changed by a man's hand?
If you have some specific verse, let's have it. We can talk about the 'errors' in that verse. I just have no wish to talk in abstract terms about hypothetical errors that may or may not exist.
You have my sympathy.
You are missing out on so much, but that is your right.
@atpollard Matthew 28:19
What seems to have been written is disciple, the verb. It was changed to disciple the noun, made plural and the verb make was added.
So what God breathed was this: Disciple the nations baptize them and teach them.
It was changed to Go therefore and make disciples of the nations baptize them and teach them.
I have argued this 100 times or more. I don't want to hear from you what I already know and what has been illustrated for me more times than I can count. I know why you think it says "make disciples". I don't want to hear it again.
To disciple is a verb.
To make is a different verb.
They changed the verb disciple to the verb make.
What seems to have been written is disciple, the verb. It was changed to disciple the noun, made plural and the verb make was added.
So what God breathed was this: Disciple the nations baptize them and teach them.
It was changed to Go therefore and make disciples of the nations baptize them and teach them.
I have argued this 100 times or more. I don't want to hear from you what I already know and what has been illustrated for me more times than I can count. I know why you think it says "make disciples". I don't want to hear it again.
To disciple is a verb.
To make is a different verb.
They changed the verb disciple to the verb make.
I respect what wise people have said about God. I have honor for those who have made the attempt to illuminate the world about The True God. I do not need your sympathy. I should have sympathy for you because I believe you are like these: Matthew 13:15 For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.'
It is written God will write the law on people's hearts. Does that mean that on my heart I should have the Bible?
Why do you not try this?
Disciple means to make. (according to you and every other idolater)
Does make mean to disciple?
Disciple means to make. (according to you and every other idolater)
Does make mean to disciple?
djhwoodwerks
Well-Known Member
Is the "Bible" the "Law"?
Some people say the Bible is what God has said. It is my opinion that what God says is law. So, my answer is no, but their answer seems to be yes.
Just to be clear, you respect what wise people say, but reject what Apostles write ... and my calloused heart prevents me from joining you. Is that really your argument?
I am sure you worship a beautiful idol of your own creation that looks exactly like you imagined it should.
As of 1913, the only definition of disciple as a verb that was not obsolete is: "3. To make disciples of; to convert to doctrines or principles."
So I don't know who all these other idolaters that you are getting your definitions from are, but that is not the definition of the verb 'to disciple' and has not been for at let the last 100 years.
Thus your challenge is nonsensical and I grow weary of these false accusations (like idolatry).
I do not know why you say I reject what Apostles write.